Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment

• At common law, a competent adult can refuse life-sustaining medical treatment, either contemporaneously or through an advance directive which will operate at a later time when the adult’s capacity is lost. • Legislation in most Australian jurisdictions also provides for a competent adult to complete an advance directive that refuses life-sustaining medical treatment. • At common law, a court exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction can consent to, or authorise, the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining medical treatment from an adult or child who lacks capacity if that is in the best interests of the person. A court may also declare that the withholding or withdrawal of treatment is lawful. • Guardianship legislation in most jurisdictions allows a substitute decision-maker, in an appropriate case, to refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for an adult who lacks capacity. • In terms of children, a parent may refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for his or her child if it is in the child’s best interests. • While a refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment by a competent child may be valid, this decision can be overturned by a court. • At common law and generally under guardianship statutes, demand for futile treatment need not be complied with by doctors.

Children and consent to medical treatment

This chapter deals with the law concerning children and consent to medical treatment. Where a child under the age of 18 requires medical treatment, issues arise as to who may lawfully consent to the treatment and under what circumstances. Depending on the circumstances, consent may be given by the child’s parent or guardian; the child; or a court. The chapter provides a thorough treatment of Australian law about these issues and circumstances.

Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia

This article examines Finnis' and Keown's claim that the intention/foresight distinction should be used as the basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawing medical treatment, rather than the act/omission distinction which is currently used. I argue that whilst the intention/foresight distinction is sound and can apply to palliative pain relief hastening death, it cannot be applied to withholding and withdrawing medical treatment. Instead, the act/omission distinction remains the better basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawal, and law reform is consequently unnecessary.

Advance directives, autonomy and the refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment

As Australian society 1s agemg, individuals are increasingly concerned about managing their future, including making decisions about the medical treatment they may wish to receive or refuse if they lose decision-making capacity. To date, there has been relatively little research into the extent to which legal regulation allows competent adults to make advance refusals of life-sustaining medical treatment that will bind health professionals and others when a decision needs to be made at a future time. This thesis aims to fill this gap in the research by presenting the results of research into the legal regulation of advance directives that refuse life-sustaining medical treatment. In the five papers that comprise this thesis, the law that governs this area is examined, and the ethical principle of autonomy is used to critically evaluate that law. The principal finding of this research is that the current scheme of regulation is ineffective to adequately promote the right of a competent adult to make binding advance directives about refusal of medical treatment. The research concludes that legislation should be enacted to enable individuals to complete an advance directive, only imposing restrictions to the extent that this is necessary to promote individual autonomy. The thesis first examines the principle of autonomy upon which the common law (and some statutory law) is expressed to be based, to determine whether that principle is an appropriate one to underpin regulation. 1 The finding of the research is that autonomy can be justified as an organising principle on a number of grounds: it is consistent with the values of a liberal democracy; over recent decades, it is a principle that has been even more prominent within the discipline of medical ethics; and it is the principle which underpins the legal regulation of a related topic, namely the contemporaneous refusal of medical treatment. Next, the thesis reviews the common law to determine whether it effectively achieves the goal of promoting autonomy by allowing a competent adult to make an advance directive refusing treatment that will operate if he or she later loses decision-making capacity. 2 This research finds that conunon law doctrine, as espoused by the judiciary, prioritises individual choice by recognising valid advance directives that refuse treatment as binding. However, the research also concludes that the common law, as applied by the judiciary in some cases, may not be effective to promote individual autonomy, as there have been a number of circumstances where advance directives that refuse treatment have not been followed. The thesis then examines the statutory regimes in Australia that regulate advance directives, with a focus on the regulation of advance refusals of life-sustaining medical treatment.3 This review commences with an examination ofparliamentary debates to establish why legislation was thought to be necessary. It then provides a detailed review of all of the statutory regimes, the extent to which the legislation regulates the form of advance directives, and the circumstances in which they can be completed, will operate and can be ignored by medical professionals. The research finds that legislation was enacted mainly to clarify the common law and bring a level of certainty to the field. Legislative regimes were thought to provide medical professionals with the assurance that compliance with an advance directive that refuses life-sustaining medical treatment will not expose them to legal sanction. However, the research also finds that the legislation places so many restrictions on when an advance directive refusing treatment can be made, or will operate, that they have not been successful in promoting individual autonomy.

Refusal of medical treatment : a child's prerogative?

Society has a need for children to be able to make health care decisions. Homeless children need access to health care. Parents may not be accessible or competent to consent to their child’s health care. The familial relationship may have broken down. Children may not want their parents to know about drug, alcohol or pregnancy related issues. There is legal and academic support for the right of children to make autonomous decisions with respect to their health care. However what these decisions cover and who can make them is not clear. Whether or not a minor has capacity and is therefore competent to consent to medical treatment is a question of law. Some states of Australia have enacted legislation, while others rely on the common law to determine this issue. At common law a minor is capable of giving consent to medical treatment when he or she achieves a sufficient understanding and intelligence to be able to understand fully what is proposed. Known as ‘Gillick competence’ this is a well known principle of law. The question posed by this paper is whether the decision of a ‘Gillick competent’ child can and should be overridden by the court?

Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment

• At common law, a competent adult can refuse life-sustaining medical treatment, either contemporaneously or through an advance directive which will operate at a later time when the adult’s capacity is lost. • Legislation in most Australian jurisdictions also provides for a competent adult to complete an advance directive that refuses life-sustaining medical treatment. • At common law, a court exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction can consent to, or authorise, the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining medical treatment from an adult or child who lacks capacity if that is in the best interests of the person. A court may also declare that the withholding or withdrawal of treatment is lawful. • Guardianship legislation in all jurisdictions allows a substitute decision-maker, in an appropriate case, to refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for an adult who lacks capacity. • In terms of children, a parent may refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for his or her child if it is in the child’s best interests. • While a refusal of life-sustaining medical treatment by a competent child may be valid, this decision can be overturned by a court. • At common law and generally under guardianship statutes, demand for futile treatment need not be complied with by doctors.

Doctors' knowledge of the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment

Objectives To examine the level of knowledge of doctors about the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack decision-making capacity, and factors associated with a higher level of knowledge. Design, setting and participants Postal survey of all specialists in emergency medicine, geriatric medicine, intensive care, medical oncology, palliative medicine, renal medicine and respiratory medicine on the AMPCo Direct database in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. Survey initially posted to participants on 18 July 2012 and closed on 31 January 2013. Main outcome measures Medical specialists’ levels of knowledge about the law, based on their responses to two survey questions. Results Overall response rate was 32%. For the seven statements contained in the two questions about the law, the mean knowledge score was 3.26 out of 7. State and specialty were the strongest predictors of legal knowledge. Conclusions Among doctors who practise in the end-of-life field, there are some significant knowledge gaps about the law on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack decision-making capacity. Significant consequences for both patients and doctors can flow from a failure to comply with the law. Steps should be taken to improve doctors’ legal knowledge in this area and to harmonise the law across Australia.

Children and consent to medical treatment

This chapter provides a comprehensive and up-to-date treatment of legislative provisions and common law principles regarding children and the law of consent to medical treatment. When can children provide their own consent? Can parents consent on behalf of their children, and if so, under what circumstances and why? Is court authority ever required, and if so, when, and why? What new contexts are providing fresh challenges to legal principles, parents, medical practitioners, and most importantly, children?

Is The Burden of Medical Education Affecting Ethics of Medical Treatment?

A substantial number of medical students in India have to bear an enormous financial burden for earning a bachelor's degree in medicine referred to as MBBS (bachelor of medicine and bachelor of surgery). This degree program lasts for four and one-half years followed by one year of internship. A postgraduate degree, such as MD, has to be pursued separately on completion of a MBBS. Every medical college in India is part of a hospital where the medical students get clinical exposure during the course of their study. All or at least a number of medical colleges in a given state are affiliated to a university that mainly plays a role of an overseeing authority. The medical colleges usually have no official interaction with other disciplines of education such as science and engineering, perhaps because of their independent location and absence of emphasis on medical research. However, many of the medical colleges are adept in imparting high-quality and sound training in medical practices including diagnostics and treatment. The medical colleges in India are generally of two types, i.e., government owned and private. Since only a limited number of seats are available across India in the former category of colleges, only a small fraction of aspiring candidates can find admission in these colleges after performing competitively in the relevant entrance tests. A major advantage of studying in these colleges is the nominal tuition fees that have to be paid. On the other hand, a large majority of would-be medical graduates have to seek admission in the privately run medical institutes in which the tuition and other related fees can be mind boggling when compared to their public counterparts. Except for candidates of exceptionally affluent background, the only alternative for fulfilling the dream of becoming a doctor is by financing one's study through hefty bank loans that may take years to pay back. It is often heard from patients that they are asked by doctors to undergo a plethora of diagnostic tests for apparently minor illnesses, which may financially benefit those prescribing the tests. The present paper attempts to throw light on the extent of disparity in cost of a medical education between state-funded and privately managed medical colleges in India; the average salary of a new medical graduate, which is often ridiculously low when compared to what is offered in entry-level engineering and business jobs; and the possible repercussions of this apparently unjust economic situation regarding the exploitation of patients.

An integrated alcohol abuse and medical treatment model for patients with hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have high rates of alcohol consumption, which is associated with progression of fibrosis and lower response rates to HCV treatment. AIMS: This prospective cohort study examined the feasibility of a 24-week integrated alcohol and medical treatment to HCV-infected patients. METHODS: Patients were recruited from a hepatology clinic if they had an Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score >4 for women and >8 for men, suggesting hazardous alcohol consumption. The integrated model included patients receiving medical care and alcohol treatment within the same clinic. Alcohol treatment consisted of 6 months of group and individual therapy from an addictions specialist and consultation from a study team psychiatrist as needed. RESULTS: Sixty patients were initially enrolled, and 53 patients participated in treatment. The primary endpoint was the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) alcohol composite scores, which significantly decreased by 0.105 (41.7% reduction) between 0 and 3 months (P < 0.01) and by 0.128 (50.6% reduction) between 0 and 6 months (P < 0.01) after adjusting for covariates. Alcohol abstinence was reported by 40% of patients at 3 months and 44% at 6 months. Patients who did not become alcohol abstinent had reductions in their ASI alcohol composite scores from 0.298 at baseline to 0.219 (26.8% reduction) at 6 months (P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that an integrated model of alcohol treatment and medical care could be successfully implemented in a hepatology clinic with significant favorable impact on alcohol use and abstinence among patients with chronic HCV.

Successful medical treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis

Purpose: To describe the outcome of a series of Acanthamoeba keratitis treated with a similar regimen. Methods: All cases diagnosed with Acanthamoeba keratitis in a referral centre from June 1994 through June 1997 were included. Diagnosis of Acanthamoeba keratitis was based in clinical presentation and laboratory results. Positive laboratory identification of Acanthamoeba from corneal scraping or contact lens was required, unless the patient had very characteristic symptoms (severe pain) and signs of the infection, including perineural infiltrates. Initial intensive treatment included topical polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) 0.02%, propamidine isothionate 0.1% and broad-spectrum antibiotics. The treatment was gradually tapered. After documented response to anti-acanthamoeba therapy, topical steroids were introduced; they were discontinued before cessation of the antiAcanthamoeba regimen. Results: Six males and four females, with a mean age of 30.0 ± 7.4 years were included in this study. All cases weared contact lenses. On presentation all cases had severe pain, and epitheliopathy was associated with stromal infiltrate in most (seven of ten) cases. Four patients had anterior uveitis. Perineural infiltrates were present in three cases and ring infiltrate in one patient. Anti-amoebic treatment was started 12.7 ± 7.2 days after beginning of symptoms. The clinical response to therapy was very satisfactory in all patients. Within two to three weeks all patients had remarkable lessening of pain and photophobia, and improvement of clinical signs. At two to three months, visual acuity had improved in all patients. Two patients required penetrating keratoplasty for visual rehabilitation. Conclusion: The use of PHMB and propamidine cured all cases of Acanthamoeba keratitis. Cautious introduction of steroids was associated with expedited resolution of inflammation and provided symptomatic relief.

Medical treatment and the good death: an ethical analysis of euthanasia, physician assisted suicide, and the right to die

Frequent advances in medical technologies have brought fonh many innovative treatments that allow medical teams to treal many patients with grave illness and serious trauma who would have died only a few years earlier. These changes have given some patients a second chance at life, but for others. these new treatments have merely prolonged their dying. Instead of dying relatively painlessly, these unfortunate patients often suffer from painful tenninal illnesses or exist in a comatose state that robs them of their dignity, since they cannot survive without advanced and often dehumanizing forms of treatment. Due to many of these concerns, euthanasia has become a central issue in medical ethics. Additionally, the debate is impacted by those who believe that patients have the right make choices about the method and timing of their deaths. Euthanasia is defined as a deliberate act by a physician to hasten the death of a patient, whether through active methods such as an injection of morphine, or through the withdrawal of advanced forms of medical care, for reasons of mercy because of a medical condition that they have. This study explores the question of whether euthanasia is an ethical practice and, as determined by ethical theories and professional codes of ethics, whether the physician is allowed to provide the means to give the patient a path to a "good death," rather than one filled with physical and mental suffering. The paper also asks if there is a relevant moral difference between the active and passive forms of euthanasia and seeks to define requirements to ensure fully voluntary decision making through an evaluation of the factors necessary to produce fully informed consent. Additionally, the proper treatments for patients who suffer from painful terminal illnesses, those who exist in persistent vegetative states and infants born with many diverse medical problems are examined. The ultimate conclusions that are reached in the paper are that euthanasia is an ethical practice in certain specific circumstances for patients who have a very low quality of life due to pain, illness or serious mental deficits as a result of irreversible coma, persistent vegetative state or end-stage clinical dementia. This is defended by the fact that the rights of the patient to determine his or her own fate and to autonomously decide the way that he or she dies are paramount to all other factors in decisions of life and death. There are also circumstances where decisions can be made by health care teams in conjunction with the family to hasten the deaths of incompetent patients when continued existence is clearly not in their best interest, as is the case of infants who are born with serious physical anomalies, who are either 'born dying' or have no prospect for a life that is of a reasonable quality. I have rejected the distinction between active and passive methods of euthanasia and have instead chosen to focus on the intentions of the treating physician and the voluntary nature of the patient's request. When applied in equivalent circumstances, active and passive methods of euthanasia produce the same effects, and if the choice to hasten the death of the patient is ethical, then the use of either method can be accepted. The use of active methods of euthanasia and active forms of withdrawal of life support, such as the removal of a respirator are both conscious decisions to end the life of the patient and both bring death within a short period of time. It is false to maintain a distinction that believes that one is active killing. whereas the other form only allows nature to take it's course. Both are conscious choices to hasten the patient's death and should be evaluated as such. Additionally, through an examination of the Hippocratic Oath, and statements made by the American Medical Association and the American College of physicians, it can be shown that the ideals that the medical profession maintains and the respect for the interests of the patient that it holds allows the physician to give aid to patients who wish to choose death as an alternative to continued suffering. The physician is also allowed to and in some circumstances, is morally required, to help dying patients whether through active or passive forms of euthanasia or through assisted suicide. Euthanasia is a difficult topic to think about, but in the end, we should support the choice that respects the patient's autonomous choice or clear best interest and the respect that we have for their dignity and personal worth.